ISTAND wrote:Did you even read the article? It clearly states he got his JD from Florida and his school loans from undergrad and his masters.

"Jason Bohn, who received his J.D. from the University of Florida, is earning $33 an hour as a legal temp while strapped to more than $200,000 in loans, nearly all of which he accumulated as an undergraduate and while working on a master's degree at Columbia University."

sundance95 wrote:

DoubleChecks wrote:i could be wrong, but i think they edited the original article because it was misleading and there were some complaints all around

You're not wrong.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what are you guys talking about? The original article did not state that Bohn when to UF. That's the entire genesis of the controversy. See:

NYT wrote:This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 11, 2011

An earlier version of this article misstated the educational history of Jason Bohn, a recent law school graduate. While Mr. Bohn took classes at Columbia Law School, his law degree is from the University of Florida. And while nearly all of his student loan debt was accumulated at Columbia University, it was incurred while he was an undergraduate and while working on a master’s degree, and not at Columbia Law.

uh, im even more confused now bronte. let me recap what went down so far from my point of view:

hazel eyes says bohn's linkedln is misleading...how he did not graduate from columbia law and how the article is misleading

istand asks if hazel even read the article, since the article says bohn received his JD from UF

now this was because the original article was misleading and made it seem as if he graduated from CLS (the links and controversy you reference)...so it was edited. hazel saw original, istand saw edited...which led to my comment on how i thought that it was cause they edited the original to reflect reality.

sundance confirms my comment.

then your comment lol. sundance and i never said the original article said bohn went to UF. in fact, we said the opposite.

I feel like if things remain the same in twenty years, we need to be giving our children better advice. First, only be willing to take out loans (if at all) at their final academic institution. It is crazy if people have to take out loans for college, then a masters program, and then law school (unless you decide you want to stay in school your whole life, finish with fifteen degrees and laugh at the loan agencies). I think the SAT, LSAT or whatever is exponentially more important than what it once was, and good parents should let their kids in high school ditch class for months at a time to study for the SAT.

Further,I think we need a new poll that states how many former prospective lawyers are brushing up on their biology? My brother is a doctor, and I am beginning to feel like an idiot. Sure, his loans may have been bigger, and he looked like an old man when he was in school. But after all of his BS, he is guaranteed a job anywhere in the country, and can change jobs whenever he wants. He does still work a decent amount of hours, but the stress has to be much less. It is truly a job where all you have to do is be smart and study, pass and be rewarded for life.

The good news, quoting from that documentary on the CA bar, is that law is the only profession where the pessimists out perform the optimists. So maybe all of us doubters are actually pursuing the right profession?

If students from T-14 not all, but most or some score these summer associates jobs that pay $3000-3500 a week(if it's true that summer associates earn that much), why aren't these bright young individuals living in accordance with student conditions, and instead of doing "whatever" with their money pay down their debt? Something isn't right here!

Very few actually make that much. Especially now.

I know T14 who did shitlaw jobs and volunteering to avoid the resume gap last summer.

I wouldn't say they are - they are probably within the guidelines when they report. However, I would guess that if you went up and down the hundreds of graduates per year they are churning out and ask if they think they are in the type of job they thought they would be in after graduation, a decent percentage would report back with a "no." The classes there are huge and being below median is not a good place to be coming out of there from what I have heard.

"Within guidelines" doesn't mean it isn't misrepresented when the guidelines are as weak as they are. Counting people who have a 6-week temp job looking at admissions applications as "employed" seems like misrepresentation to me.

Amen especially if they give them that job for that purpose. Not outright but suspect.

jaestro wrote:I feel like if things remain the same in twenty years, we need to be giving our children better advice. First, only be willing to take out loans (if at all) at their final academic institution. It is crazy if people have to take out loans for college, then a masters program, and then law school (unless you decide you want to stay in school your whole life, finish with fifteen degrees and laugh at the loan agencies). I think the SAT, LSAT or whatever is exponentially more important than what it once was, and good parents should let their kids in high school ditch class for months at a time to study for the SAT.

Further,I think we need a new poll that states how many former prospective lawyers are brushing up on their biology? My brother is a doctor, and I am beginning to feel like an idiot. Sure, his loans may have been bigger, and he looked like an old man when he was in school. But after all of his BS, he is guaranteed a job anywhere in the country, and can change jobs whenever he wants. He does still work a decent amount of hours, but the stress has to be much less. It is truly a job where all you have to do is be smart and study, pass and be rewarded for life.

The good news, quoting from that documentary on the CA bar, is that law is the only profession where the pessimists out perform the optimists. So maybe all of us doubters are actually pursuing the right profession?

I don't think the choice between being a doctor and lawyer is there for most people and if it is then you are probably perusing both for the wrong reasons. I think the real fallout is that many people were blinded (by themselves) to believe that practicing law is a sure way to a big paycheck. In reality, especially ITE, it is not. Once you consider debt, law isn't much better than other fields really since any field (including those that don't even need college degrees) can lead big money for people who excel at what they do, which is necessary as a law student and associate to make big money in law.

After a review of your LSAC account it has been determined that youqualify for admission to the California School of Law’s JurisDoctorate program. The California School of Law is approved to useLSAC’s Credential Assembly Service to receive your LSAT score andtranscripts for admissions. Graduates of our program are eligible tosit for the Bar Exam in California as well as in other states tobecome attorneys.

The next semester begins April 5, 2011 with an application deadlineof March 1, 2011.

If you are interested in further information, go toCaliforniaSchoolofLaw.com** Live Virtual Classrooms**

The California School of Law ("CSL") is an online law school with thegoal of providing an educational experience that is as close aspossible to that at a traditional residential law school. Students atCSL can see and speak live with their professors and classmates bylogging into a Virtual Classroom from a computer at home or work.

Students and instructors meet in virtual classrooms to discuss casesand debate the law from the same casebooks used at major law schools.The virtual classes meet each week on Tuesday and Thursday evenings,where students participate in live law school classes, answering andasking questions, utilizing the Socratic Method.

Classroom participation with professors obviously is an importantpart of law school, but communication outside the classroom betweenstudents also is important. At the California School of Law, studentscan form study groups to discuss cases, trade class outlines, prep fortests, as well as make friends and networking connections that last alifetime.

** Tuition and Financial Aid **

Tuition is charged by the semester.

* One Semester $2,500.00

* One year or Three Trimesters $7,500.00

* 4 year Juris Doctorate Degree $30,000.00

The California School of Law runs on trimesters, following atraditional 15 week/4 month law school semester.

California School of Law provides students with several affordableand attractive installment loan plans. All students enrolled in theCalifornia School of Law will be approved for a loan. All plansrequire some payment while attending law school. Tuition is charged bythe semester, not the year, keeping both the principal and interestlow.

1. Enroll in classes (I guess I'm gonna be accepted despite applying there)2. Pay 30,000 total for the four year program3. Increase my "e-rep"4. Be $170,000+, less in debt that the people in the article.5. Profit

amonynous_ivdinidual wrote:the comment about closing law schools/limiting enrollments would run afoul of antitrust laws caught my attention. why is it ok for the AMA to regulate med schools in this way, but the ABA would be precluded by antitrust rules? sounds fishy to me. the ABA should restore some prestige and integrity to its profession, and here is step 1- take the bottom 50 law schools (by whatever metric the ABA wants to use) out back and shoot them. then tell law schools 101-150 that it's open season on them. after a 5-10 year period the top 25 performers of these schools (again, pick your metric, but i say LEGITIMATE job reports for grads are a good start) will be allowed to remain open.

then, strictly limit the numbers of students law schools can enroll, not unlike the approach the AMA takes.

the profession could survive on 125 law schools.

let's step outside the box of supply/demand and fix what's obviously broken. we do it all the time, and the market endures, so please don't warn me of the imminent demise of the free market if these measures were taken. i don't really care. i'd rather have a job.

while I admire your direct approach, it's probably easier to reform financial aid so that some schools don't get to have their students' loans subsidized. That would probably avoid the anti-trust issues too (though WTF do I know...)

Last edited by Borhas on Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

An article last Sunday about law schools misstated the educational history of Jason Bohn, a recent law school graduate.While Mr. Bohn took classes at Columbia Law School, his law degree is from the University of Florida. And while nearly all of his student loan debt was accumulated at Columbia University, it was incurred while he was an undergraduate and while working on a master’s degree, and not at Columbia Law.

Wait, are we sure this is the same guy? Couldn't there be multiple Jason Bohns in the same city? If it's not him, I feel pretty bad for the guy - now he'll pretty much never get a non-contract attorney job.

NYT wrote:Instead, Mr. Wallerstein rented a spacious apartment. He also spent a month studying in the South of France and a month in Prague — all on borrowed money. There were cost-of-living loans, and tuition of about $33,000 a year. Later came a $15,000 loan to cover months of studying for the bar.

Today, his best guess is that he should be sending $2,000 to $3,000 a month in total, to lenders that include Wells Fargo, Citibank and Sallie Mae.

“There are a bunch of others,” he says. “I’m not really good at keeping records.”

Mr. Wallerstein didn’t know it at the time, but Thomas Jefferson leads the nation’s law schools in at least one category: 95 percent of students graduate with debt, the highest rate in the U.S. News rankings.

The reason, Ms. Kransberger says, is that many Thomas Jefferson students are either immigrants or, like Mr. Wallerstein, the first person in their family to get a law degree; statistically those are both groups with generally little or modest means. When Ms. Kransberger meets applicants engaged in what she calls “magical thinking” about their finances, she advises them to defer for a year or two until they are on stronger footing.

Idiot. I don't know what to say other than this example is the utter extreme case.